Hey guys,

I've been pting for the last month or so for the December LSAT. I have improved immensely in LG and LR because I feel like I've been blind reviewing this sections pretty effectively. I try to blind review RC as well, but I don't feel like my level of understanding in this section has improved much since I started doing PT's.

Does anyone have any advice on how to get the most out of reviewing RC after a PT?

A condition stated is "Within each segment, reports are ordered by length, from longest to shortest." For purposes of my question I'd like to emphasize that this condition, like all LG rules, is an absolute rule that must be followed.

We are given no information about the length relation of T to either of W or I. Despite this:

The correct answer to Q1, the typical "acceptable configuration" question, implies T — W (where "—" is the usual notation indicating relative order). If this is a way of providing more information, i.e., another rule, it is unique in my limited experience.

The correct answers to Q5 and Q6 imply T — I.

How can T — W or T — I be required assumptions to answer correctly without our having any information that would support them?

The explanation for this game does not address my question.

Hey everyone! I just wanted some suggestions or techniques for approaching weakening q's. I'm finding that while timing myself, I take a longer time or I rush when solving weakening questions because I take too long. I average around 1 minute and half, sometimes closer to 2 mins, even on the easier questions. I think it's because I'm trying to reason it out completely (find all alternative assumptions, etc.) However, on blind review my accuracy is pretty good, as I'll usually get all or almost all of them right. Are there any techniques or strategies you guys use in order to increase speed on weakening q's, or even all LR question types? Thanks!

I would appreciate if somebody could clarify this one for me..

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-2-question-14/

Here, JY equates, “Those who ate the most chocolate were the most likely to feel depressed” with “Chocolate Consumption –positively correlated with– Depression”

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-47-section-1-question-26/

Here, JY says “Ones who improved the most were the ones who learned to write the most automatically” is not establishing a correlation. (because we don't know what happened to the 2nd tier people)

What’s going on?

I have also posted a similar question on the PT 72 S2 Q14 down in the comment..

1. Those who ate the most chocolate were the most likely to feel depressed.

2. The more chocolate one consumed, the more likely he/she felt depressed.

Aren’t these two different in meaning? Because for the first statement we don’t know what happened to the middle/low range chocolate eaters..

But we still translate both of them as..

Chocolate Consumption –positively correlated with– Depression

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance!

Hey, could someone help explain why E is the correct answer choice? I understand why others are incorrect.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-41-section-3-question-19/

For LR questions asking you to express the main point or the conclusion, how do you know when the answer is going to state the exact conclusion sentence in the stimulus or if the question wants you the conclusion that comes from combining the premises and expressing what the argument is saying overall? I can elaborate if this makes no sense but I feel like with some conclusion questions the answer is basically a restatement of the particular conclusion sentence in the argument but for other questions it's looking for me to combine the premises and overall conclude what the argument is getting at.

I heard 72 and 76 are brutal...Which prep test in 70s is your personal best?

hey guys, just wanted to share with you how i've been drilling LR recently and let you know that so far it has been paying off.

i'm sure its nothing ground breaking and has certainly been done before, but it has helped me anticipate the answer choices :) -- it occurred to me after hearing Johnathan say that he never uses POE to get to the answer choices...

http://imgur.com/wFQnSGE

Earlier this week during a Sage/Instructor chat on Discord with Jonathan, argument structure came up. The following link is the only list of LR questions I've been able to find with argument structure. This list mainly groups LR questions by flaw type (circular reasoning, false binarism, appeal to authority etc). If you CTRL+F you can search by "correlation/causation" for that subset of phenomenon/hypothesis questions and for conditional logic search "formal logic" or "necessary/sufficient". This is the closest thing I've found to a list of LR questions per PT by argument type. http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=108425

Hello 7Sage!

I have problems for this question.

The question stem mentions the preference in Passage A:

Preference for coherence connecting variety, not too simple (pure tone) = not interesting; not too complex = bad

so i'm looking for some kind of in the middle of the spectrum

I choose Answer (A): Preference for white noice when sleeping : not totally silence (pure tone) ; not too loud (too complex)

Answer (B): not knowing why it's matching the preference analogy?

Thanks for your help!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-2-passage-4-passage/

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-58-section-2-passage-4-questions/

I am scheduled to write the December 2016 LSAT. I am having some anxiety regarding the photo requirement. In my opinion, the photo fits the requirements. However, the photo was taken with an I-Phone 7 and although it is clear, I am still worried about the particular proctor I may encounter on test day that would say otherwise. I have read various forums and in general, people have have minimal trouble with the proctors accepting their photos.

However, I am worried that I might get that one proctor who gives me grief. Is there any way that an actual LSAC employee can confirm that my photo is acceptable? It is 326 pixels per inch, which is well above the minimum of 72 pixels per inch. If by chance that the photo is not accepted, can I bring a professionally taken passport photo as well as my passport and driver's licence as "back up."

I have read some horror stories regarding proctors who are uninformed about LSAC rules and turn students away or who also unnecessarily turn students away for minutiae that they deem unacceptable, in a pathetic attempt to exercise power. People who are taking the LSAT are usually under immense stress and have likely spent a good amount of money applying to law schools and paying LSAC registration fees. LSAC should make more concerted efforts so that the proctors (who are not LSAC employees) do not make arbitrary, subjective judgment calls. Honestly, the previous requirement of having a passport taken and then attached as a physical copy to the LSAT ticket was a much better option, in my opinion. The fact that they base so much on "the proctor's discretion" is just ridiculous to me. Can anyone share their experiences regarding the photo requirement? Is anyone else stressed about this or am I just being nuts?!

For some reason...I miss a lot on this question.

What some strategy worked for you?

I tried to find whether they agree, disagree, no opinion strategy but it did not really work for me...the part I thought they disagree turned out one of them does not have opinion and something like that.

How do you tackle this type of question?

The lesson Logic Games Habits for Speed and Accuracy says about re-writing rules in visual language: "Write out rules neatly, close to each other, numbered [emphasis added]."

I have been wondering why JY always numbers his re-written rules. I've not seen any use made of the numbers that helps to answer questions. I can see occasional convenience of reference when, in talking to us watchers of the video explanations, JY deletes or combines or uses a rule. But I'm not as yet seeing a reason for me to number my rules.

I know Yale, Northwestern, UVA, Michigan ask for optional essays...are there any others among T14 schools?

should I write optional essays?

Hi,

I found I miss points especially on this question.

Sometimes we have to find info from sentences located in different place in passages...and its hard to find the right info immediately.

How do you answer those questions?

Do you re-read the whole passage again or just answer by memory?

Hello all.

So i'm currently in the core curriculum trying to do the exercises and I have no problem uploading the exercises in pdf format, but I am not provided any option to print or open in iBooks.

Is this feature only available on laptops and computers? Help!

Or do you blind review every single question and if so, do you watch JY's explanation for all of them as well?

Just wanted to know what people do.

Thanks in advance!

JY has said that the target completion times shown under the explanation videos are for those who aspire to -0 or -1 per section (I think he intends section score rather than individual game score), and that students who are not yet adepts should expect longer times.

I've just been working on PT 61 S3 G4. I did the game cold and took more than 15 minutes with -1. Then I watched JY's explanation, admired it as usual, and noted that the target time annotation is 10 minutes for this "very hard" game and JY said at the start of the video that it took him a little over 9 1/2 minutes. Then I re-did the game; with no significant delays it took me 13:25 and I was -0. By "significant" I mean more than 5-10 seconds. It took me almost four minutes longer than JY said it took him. What's going on here?

One thing that's going on is that I am quite pessimistic about being able to finish four games on the upcoming Dec. 3 test.

I would love to see a video of JY (or anyone) solving a difficult LG cold in approximately the listed target time. Are there any of those?

How do you diagram "is"/"usually" statements? For example, PT 54 Section 4 Q 22.

"The morally preferable act is usually the one that serves the long term interest. Because of this, businesses often have compelling reasons to execute the morally preferable act."

I halt on these SUfficient assumption questiins because they are not readily diagrammable...

Another one is diagramming causal statements:

"Most friendships begin because someone felt comfortable approaching a stranger"

Hello,

I am debating buying a 7sage prep course right now; I am currently using the free trial. However, when I look at the video explanations on my phone for LR and RC for the June 2007 exam on the free trial, they do not load on my phone. I have an iPhone 5. Only the LG video explanations work.

Can you only access the LR and RC video explanations from a laptop? Please let me know!

Hey guys! If you're taking the December LSAT (which is on my birthday this year!) and your account is inconveniently set to expire a few days before the test date, just email me and I'll extend your account for free through the December test. (Make sure you include your 7Sage email!)

I can guarantee you that my inbox will fill up with these, so give me time to reply to them all. If your account expires by the time I get to your email, don't worry, I'll reactivate it for you. :)

For those of you who are expiring after, good luck on the LSAT! We here at 7Sage are rooting for you.

I am not sure why answer choice D in question 68 section 3 of PT 68 is incorrect. Here is an explanation for why I think D can be considered the correct answer.

I made 3 assumptions about parallel reasoning questions which I would like to explain with aid of the following (flawed) reference argument:

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: B -->C

Assumption 1) Contrapositives are permitted and do not change the structure of parallel reasoning question. For example, the following argument would be considered parallel to the reference argument:

Premises: 1. not B --> not A (this is a contrapositive of A --> B)

2. A --> C

Conclusion: not C --> not B (this is a contrapositive of B --> C)

Assumption 2) Swapping a given variable with its negation at every single occurrence of the said variable does not change the structure of the argument. This is because any variable can be redefined to be the negated version of its original definition. For instance, instead of defining D = dog, we can define D = not dog and then swap every single occurrence of D and not D in the argument without affecting its structure.

For example, the following would be considered parallel to the argument stated above (in assumption #1) and thus, by extension, also to the reference argument:

Premises: 1. not B --> A

2. not A --> not C

Conclusion: C --> not B

Note that I swapped A and not A as well as C and not C from the example in assumption #1.

3) The positioning of the premises is irrelevant to the structure of the argument and thus swapping them is permissible. For instance, the following argument would be considered parallel to the reference argument:

Premises: 1. A --> C

2. A --> B

Conclusion: B --> C

I just swapped premises 1 and 2 from the reference argument.

Now, onto the question. Here is how I traced out the argument in the stimulus:

Premises: 1. balcony --> fireplace

2. balcony --> no 1-bedroom

Conclusion: 1-bedroom ---> no fireplace

Replacing words with symbols in the above argument:

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> no C

Conclusion: C ---> no B

Swap C and no C (assumption #2):

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: no C ---> no B

Take contrapositive of conclusion (assumption #1):

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: B --> C (contrapositive of no C ---> no B)

Analysis of flaw: one necessary condition leads to another necessary condition. I am going to look for parallel of this in the answer choice.

Now, onto answer choice D. Here is how I traced out the argument in the answer choice:

Premises: 1. cat --> no dog

2. dog --> no fish

Conclusion: cat ---> fish

Take contrapositive of premise #1 and conclusion (assumption #1):

Premises: 1. dog --> no cat (contrapositive of cat --> no dog)

2. dog --> no fish

Conclusion: no fish ---> no cat (contrapositive of cat --> fish)

Swap premises #1 and #2 (assumption #3):

Premises: 1. dog --> no fish

2. dog --> no cat

Conclusion: no fish ---> no cat

Change to symbols:

Premises: 1. A --> no B

2. A --> no C

Conclusion: no B ---> no C

Swap B with no B and C with no C (assumption #2):

Premises: 1. A --> B

2. A --> C

Conclusion: B ---> C

Eureka!!! Exact same structure as the stimulus.

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-68-section-3-question-24/

So i will be getting my preptest 79 november 28 or 29. what should i do with this preptest before the december lsat? it will only be a few days before the real deal. should i just do a blind review and try the Logic games timed? any advice will be appreciated. I'm sure there are others with this predicament.

I just wanted to see how you guys view all of the elements of the application. I know the personal statement is the most important, but how do you guys see the other elements we can add to the applications? Are all of you writing those? Will they push students over the top or are they kind of moot points?

Basically, are they necessary, and will schools look down on you if you don't use them?

Hi

So on LG I meet this kind of rule sometimes

A---B→C---D "If A is before B, then C is before D"

Is this actually bi-conditional in sinmple sequence game?

For grouping sequence game, it may not be necessary true, but for simple sequece game there is only either before or after something, so...

By the way we cannot delete our threads right?

I wonder what if we solve the question before get any replies...do not want to bother other ppl in that case :(